Unpaid Agency training

Comms69

ohreally wrote: »

Then pay them.

I don't even disagree with the principle, but if it's clear it's unpaid then why jack in what could be a long term contract over a few half days?

ohreally

Comms69 wrote: »

I don't even disagree with the principle, but if it's clear it's unpaid then why jack in what could be a long term contract over a few half days?

I would postulate if this is their business model the outfit is likely not worth working for, smacks of the Dickensian.

If the training is H&S related it should be conducted during working hours and cant be charged for.

aife

I don't know this poster but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect to be paid for your time.
unfortunately I don't think there's much you can do legally.Agencies can pretty much do what they like , there are plenty of people looking for work so they probably won't care if you walk away
Is it 'Induction', or training that might actually be useful/ give you a necessary skill ?
I worked as an agency nurse some years ago and a couple of times not only had to do mandatory training without pay , but actually had to pay for the training. However it was properly accredited training with recognised certificates.
What field of work does this involve ? Are there other agencies in your area covering it ?

jobbingmusician

I think it's poor practice that the employer isn't paying for the training. However, in the OP's situation I think I would consider attending. After all, I wouldn't be doing anything better in those 2 days and I might learn something useful.

The unreasonable point for me is having to pay my own travel to the training days. I suggest the OP discusses this with her job coach, shows willingness to attend the days (as they might lead to work, or to improved skills) but points out that they cannot afford to do this, and asks what the JC would suggest.

andygb

bugslet wrote: »

I must be a real oddball because if I send my drivers on training, I pay them. Training is for my benefit as much as theirs and I am taking their time up.

It does depend what type of training it is, some training is more induction stuff, or going over the firms way of doing something rather than a useful step in learning.

I totally agree with this.
If I was doing a course to simply improve my knowledge, then I would not expect to be paid.
However, if I was working for a company and they expected me to do unpaid company training/induction in my own time, then I would tell them where to shove it.
If they get away with this, then what other parts of employment law are they going to break?

nicechap

Just playing devil's advocate.


Maybe the company have a very high drop out rate during training as people discover they don't like the reality of what the job entails.


I presume the OP will still be getting JSA or UC if they are being trained but not actually being paid.

fraserbooks

I worked as an agency nurse a few years ago and in exchange for a higher hourly rate than regular staff we were expected to do unpaid training and cover our own holiday and sickness pay. I think if the hourly pay is more than the pay of regular staff you might have to accept different terms. If I was a regular employee I would expect to be paid for essential training.

TyreLever

BorisThomson wrote: »

Hopefully this thread will have a more positive tone, but last time Helen posted she was asking people to send her money. She claimed some users had and she was going to use the money to buy prosecco, but the usernames she gave and her location did not exist. I'd hate for anyone to be drawn in by such a situation.

sangie595 has answered your question. What you need to do is speak to the Jobcentre for their view, as failure to take up work would result in a benefit sanction.

Good luck with your job search.

Amd this is the fundamental issue with JSA or UC. It means people who do work (such as me) are more likely to end up along side lazy useless can'ts. Fudgin leave em rot on the dole I say, even if it costs us all a bit extra. Its more costly in the long run to keep people like that employed anyway due to lost productivity.

Comms69

TyreLever wrote: »

Amd this is the fundamental issue with JSA or UC. It means people who do work (such as me) are more likely to end up along side lazy useless can'ts. - only if our manager choosing the useless so and so.... Fudgin leave em rot on the dole I say, even if it costs us all a bit extra. Its more costly in the long run to keep people like that employed anyway due to lost productivity.

You realise that perfectly capable people (including myself) have claimed JSA....